Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 9

 

2008-06-04 03:01:56
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6528|eXtreme to the maX
Didn't realize the US was involved in the 2006 Lebanon war...must've missed the memo on that. Perhaps you meant Hezbollah instead?
I didn't say they were, I said they weren't bothered by tedious things like the Geneva Convention - except when they try to hold other people to it.

The thread has deviated because some people have tried to claim Israel is sweetness and light and the only responsible democracy in the ME, whereas Iran and Syria are theocratic extremists who must be bombed into the stone age for even thinking about nuclear power - which is their right.

My point is Israel and the US are just as screwed up through their domination by religious nutballs as any ME states.
As a result the whole world is being pulled into a maelstrom of war and recession, and the extremists are gaining ground.

You can say what you like about Hezbollah, they are however a poorly resourced militia group.
Israel is supposedly a responsible democracy with a full Army, Navy and Air Force, just because Hezbollah doesn't stay within the Geneva convention doesn't mean Israel can forget it and do what they like.

If they want to be seen as a modern democracy not dominated by Zionist zealots they need to start behaving responsibly. Then the world might not rate them on a par with Iran or Germany under Hitler.

I renew my comment about the IRA.

Based on the views here Britain should have:-
Carried out airstrikes on Dublin - Probably the IRA had headquarters there, they certainly didn't have a big camp outside with 'Terrorists Here' painted on the roof so its safe to assume they were in civilian buildings.
Assasinated Gerry Adams, Martin McGuiness etc by dropping 1,000lb bombs on them, if any civilians were standing nearby no doubt they were IRA sympathisers so too bad.
Started a campaign of threatening a nuclear attack on and destablising the US govt as they supported the IRA by allowing them to raise funds, buy weapons, spread hatred through lectures etc in the US.
A strategy of targeted assassinations of prominent Irish Republicans in the US, or anyone of Irish descent who voted Republican would be near enough.
Abducting, detaining without charge and torturing US citizens to see if they were Republican supporters or not.

Seems perfectly reasonable and within the Geneva convention as we were under attack by ruthless terrorists targeting civilians with indiscriminate slaughter.

And heres an example of your responsible democracy.
'One weekday last year, at about three in the afternoon, Israeli armoured jeeps moved into the centre of Ramallah, pulling up outside the most popular hummus cafe.

In full view of passers-by, including children on their way back from school, the troops dragged a man in his early 20s out of the cafe. He was a wanted militant. They shot him - first in the legs, then stomach, then his head. '
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programm … 433063.stm

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-06-04 03:06:00)

Fuck Israel
2008-06-05 01:37:33
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

I didn't say they were, I said they weren't bothered by tedious things like the Geneva Convention - except when they try to hold other people to it.
You can make that argument WRT treatment of detainees, but you can't make it when it comes to military targeting...which is what we're talking about.

Dilbert_X wrote:

The thread has deviated because some people have tried to claim Israel is sweetness and light and the only responsible democracy in the ME, whereas Iran and Syria are theocratic extremists who must be bombed into the stone age for even thinking about nuclear power - which is their right.
Never said any of those things. Never implied any of those things. If you choose to infer them because of your bias, that's your issue.

Dilbert_X wrote:

My point is Israel and the US are just as screwed up through their domination by religious nutballs as any ME states.
As a result the whole world is being pulled into a maelstrom of war and recession, and the extremists are gaining ground.
Please provide an example of religious nutballs dominating the US. Not media reports of idiots saying stupid shit, but examples of where those "nutballs" actually influenced policy decisions.

Dilbert_X wrote:

You can say what you like about Hezbollah, they are their military arm is a however a poorly well-resourced militia terrorist group.
Fixed. Their outreach programs to the population in Lebanon are admirable...but their military arm has ATGMs. Not exactly "poorly resourced".

Dilbert_X wrote:

Israel is supposedly a responsible democracy with a full Army, Navy and Air Force, just because Hezbollah doesn't stay within the Geneva convention doesn't mean Israel can forget it and do what they like.
You didn't provide any proof that Israel's military operated outside of Geneva Convention guidelines. For those instances where individuals were proven to have done so, they were prosecuted.

Dilbert_X wrote:

If they want to be seen as a modern democracy not dominated by Zionist zealots they need to start behaving responsibly. Then the world might not rate them on a par with Iran or Germany under Hitler.
I agree that they need to be more circumspect, but do you expect them to just sit there and take their civilians being targeted and their soldiers being kidnapped without responding? Perhaps if Hezbollah wanted to be viewed as anything other than a puppet of Iran/Syria and a terrorist group, they should start behaving more responsibly, as well. Too bad you missed that part in your analysis.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I renew my comment about the IRA.

Based on the views here Britain should have:-
Carried out airstrikes on Dublin - Probably the IRA had headquarters there, they certainly didn't have a big camp outside with 'Terrorists Here' painted on the roof so its safe to assume they were in civilian buildings.
Assasinated Gerry Adams, Martin McGuiness etc by dropping 1,000lb bombs on them, if any civilians were standing nearby no doubt they were IRA sympathisers so too bad.
Started a campaign of threatening a nuclear attack on and destablising the US govt as they supported the IRA by allowing them to raise funds, buy weapons, spread hatred through lectures etc in the US.
A strategy of targeted assassinations of prominent Irish Republicans in the US, or anyone of Irish descent who voted Republican would be near enough.
Abducting, detaining without charge and torturing US citizens to see if they were Republican supporters or not.

Seems perfectly reasonable and within the Geneva convention as we were under attack by ruthless terrorists targeting civilians with indiscriminate slaughter.
There is a difference between legal and moral. The IDF's actions in Lebanon were legal...but not always moral. Hezbollah's were neither. Just as the IRA's were definitely illegal, and morally questionable.

Your rhetoric above (particularly the "1000lb bombs" comment) is just flawed. Dropping a bomb on a combatant is not "assassination", and it's never a "too bad" when civilians are killed. The fact that you view it that way shows just how little you truly understand (or choose to understand) about the tradeoffs in military targeting. And you forgot to mention the warnings to those civilians beforehand.

Dilbert_X wrote:

And heres an example of your responsible democracy.
'One weekday last year, at about three in the afternoon, Israeli armoured jeeps moved into the centre of Ramallah, pulling up outside the most popular hummus cafe.

In full view of passers-by, including children on their way back from school, the troops dragged a man in his early 20s out of the cafe. He was a wanted militant. They shot him - first in the legs, then stomach, then his head. '
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programm … 433063.stm
Certainly horrible...but what's the backstory? Do you really think that act was completely random? But you won't bother to find out...unless it supports your preconceptions.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-05 01:43:57
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I didn't say they were, I said they weren't bothered by tedious things like the Geneva Convention - except when they try to hold other people to it.
You can make that argument WRT treatment of detainees, but you can't make it when it comes to military targeting...which is what we're talking about.
The two issues cannot be viewed in isolation of each other.
2008-06-05 01:47:34
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

ZombieVampire! wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I didn't say they were, I said they weren't bothered by tedious things like the Geneva Convention - except when they try to hold other people to it.
You can make that argument WRT treatment of detainees, but you can't make it when it comes to military targeting...which is what we're talking about.
The two issues cannot be viewed in isolation of each other.
Actually, they absolutely can. There is enough ambiguity on the detainee side (both in the text and in the various interpretations of it and the various interpretations of the status of detainees), but there isn't much on the targeting side.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-05 02:02:19
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
The only ambiguity over US treatment of prisoner comes from selective reading by GWB and his buddies.  Even the other 2/3 of your government says that he's wrong.
2008-06-05 02:07:09
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

ZombieVampire! wrote:

The only ambiguity over US treatment of prisoner comes from selective reading by GWB and his buddies.  Even the other 2/3 of your government says that he's wrong.
They are still two separate issues, totally unrelated to one another. One is recent (detainees) and will hopefully be corrected. The other is enduring (targeting). If 2/3 of the government really said it's wrong, then the situation wouldn't exist. Those that have spoken out against it have done so out of political expediency. They certainly didn't say dammit when they were briefed on it when it started or in their regular updates to continue funding.

Last edited by FEOS (2008-06-05 02:52:06)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-05 02:12:58
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
If your issue is breaches of the Geneva Convention then they are not unrelated.
2008-06-05 02:23:11
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

ZombieVampire! wrote:

If your issue is breaches of the Geneva Convention then they are not unrelated.
That's not the issue, and if it were, they would be unrelated. If the breaches in question were in the targeting arena, the argument would be valid. Just because you speed does not mean you are an inherently unlawful person.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-05 03:10:51
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
No, but if you commit a crime and then criticise other for commiting a crime you're a hypocrite.
2008-06-05 07:20:35
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6528|eXtreme to the maX
The US and Israel have both decided the Geneva conventions don't apply to them, nor apparently does the UN.
You either take the whole law or none of it. You can't have one law for white men and another for everyone else.

Military targeting.
Bombing airports, bridges, roads, powerstations, water pumping stations, civilian tower blocks etc is unlawful, when you're doing it over two soldiers its immoral.
When you're doing it because you're taking revenge over an attack by a third party on you, or to destabilise the ME and give you a launchpad for an attack on Iran its unlawful and immoral also.

Religious Nutballs.
Israel has the US by the balls, Duhbya apparently receives messages direct from 'Gawd' - instructing him to invade Iraq if I remember, McCain feels it important to keep close to a fruitcake like Hagee, what Obama's pastor says and does is somehow politically relevant.
Why has each US Presidential candidate had to go bowing and scraping to AIPAC?
The loonies have more power than you seem to realise.

Your arguments on supporting Israel and opposing Iran and Syria are circular.
Israel is not a democracy, its not stable, its founded on a load of mumbo-jumbo from more nutballs.
You might as well be supporting Rastafarian Jamaica as a beacon of freedom in the Caribbean - if thats where they are.
The only reason Israel is supported is the fruitloops in the US believe its part of some divine destiny, nothing else.

Israel and the Geneva conventions, that could be a long thread by itself.
Fuck Israel
2008-06-05 16:49:47
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

There is so much just blatantly factually incorrect in your rant that it'll be difficult, but I will attempt to address.

Dilbert_X wrote:

The US and Israel have both decided the Geneva conventions don't apply to them, nor apparently does the UN.
You either take the whole law or none of it. You can't have one law for white men and another for everyone else.
Out right falsehood. If that were the case, individuals who violate the Geneva conventions wouldn't be getting tried and convicted. Since they are, your argument is clearly false.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Military targeting.
Bombing airports, bridges, roads, powerstations, water pumping stations, civilian tower blocks etc is unlawful, when you're doing it over two soldiers its immoral.
Wrong. Simply wrong. If any of those are tied to a military objective, they are LAWFUL targets. Period. Your (apparently uninformed) opinion does not change the legality of it.

Dilbert_X wrote:

When you're doing it because you're taking revenge over an attack by a third party on you, or to destabilise the ME and give you a launchpad for an attack on Iran its unlawful and immoral also.
Is that what the voices are telling you now? Read a bit.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Israel has the US by the balls
Israel doesn't have the US by the balls...if anything, the US has Israel by the balls.

Dilbert_X wrote:

McCain feels it important to keep close to a fruitcake like Hagee
McCain has rejected Hagee. Big difference between Hagee and Wright is that McCain didn't spend 20+ years sitting in a congregation listening to Hagee's moronic ranting.

Dilbert_X wrote:

what Obama's pastor says and does is somehow politically relevant
Obama has rejected his pastor (Wright). If you can't see the political relevance of the lack of judgment involved with voluntarily sitting in a congregation for 20+ years listening to the kind of crap Obama's pastor spouted, then there's no helping you understand. Not that you would bother to even try to understand, anyway.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Why has each US Presidential candidate had to go bowing and scraping to AIPAC?
Nobody has gone "bowing and scraping to AIPAC".

Dilbert_X wrote:

The loonies have more power than you seem to realise.
You don't live here. You have no idea how much or little power anyone has in this country other than what you choose to read in the media. It appears you don't "realise" how little power the "loonies" actually have.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Your arguments on supporting Israel and opposing Iran and Syria are circular.
No, they're not. No more than your arguments supporting Hamas and Hezbollah.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Israel is not a democracy, its not stable
It's not?

With the exception of having to fight for its very existence a few times against overwhelming odds...yeah, it's pretty stable.

Dilbert_X wrote:

its founded on a load of mumbo-jumbo from more nutballs.
So the UN Partition Plan is "mumbo-jumbo from more nutballs"? Whatever.

Dilbert_X wrote:

You might as well be supporting Rastafarian Jamaica as a beacon of freedom in the Caribbean - if thats where they are.
The only reason Israel is supported is the fruitloops in the US believe its part of some divine destiny, nothing else.
Your opinion. Your flawed, unsubstantiated, opinion. Try reading a bit and recognizing that the history of US/Israeli relations and overall US foreign policy in the ME didn't start in 2001.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Israel and the Geneva conventions, that could be a long thread by itself.
Probably so. But if you're going to keep spouting blatantly incorrect assessments of what is legal and illegal with regard to targeting, I'm not sure what good it will do.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-06 06:13:13
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6528|eXtreme to the maX
t right falsehood. If that were the case, individuals who violate the Geneva conventions wouldn't be getting tried and convicted. Since they are, your argument is clearly false.
Not really, a few minnows are being prosecuted - and poorly http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7437032.stm
The big fish are getting away with it.
Israel doesn't have the US by the balls...if anything, the US has Israel by the balls.
Then why doesn't the US instruct Israel to stop causing trouble, stop building settlements, stop stealing more land and make peace with the Palestinians? Its in the US interest to see the ME calm down.
Nobody has gone "bowing and scraping to AIPAC".
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull
Fuck Israel
2008-06-06 08:38:30
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6833|'Murka

Dilbert_X wrote:

t right falsehood. If that were the case, individuals who violate the Geneva conventions wouldn't be getting tried and convicted. Since they are, your argument is clearly false.
Not really, a few minnows are being prosecuted - and poorly http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7437032.stm
The big fish are getting away with it.
So because someone was found not guilty, you think not enough is being done? Witch trials much?
The system follows normal US and international jurisprudence. You know...that thing that you keep saying everyone needs to use? I guess that's only if you haven't predetermined their guilt on an internet game forum...

Oh. One more thing. A 1Lt isn't anything close to a "big fish". The battalion commander's trial is still pending.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Israel doesn't have the US by the balls...if anything, the US has Israel by the balls.
Then why doesn't the US instruct Israel to stop causing trouble, stop building settlements, stop stealing more land and make peace with the Palestinians? Its in the US interest to see the ME calm down.
How do you know they haven't? Regardless, I think that we should make most, if not all, our aid to them contingent upon certain behaviors WRT the Palestinians.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Nobody has gone "bowing and scraping to AIPAC".
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite? … 2FShowFull
Do you think that is the only lobbying group those people spoke to during their campaigns? AIPAC is one of HUNDREDS of lobbies in Washington. It's more of an issue that the candidates speak to ANY lobbies...not just AIPAC.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-06-07 00:10:02
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6528|eXtreme to the maX
So because someone was found not guilty, you think not enough is being done? Witch trials much?
No-one has been successfully prosecuted for wasting 24 totally blameless civilians - women, children and old men.
The only prosecution pending is for manslaughter - I'm not sure how breaking into a house and shooting unarmed 3,4,5 yr old children in the head and chest with your assault rifle is manslaughter but then I'm not in the military and I know nothing.
How do you know they haven't? Regardless, I think that we should make most, if not all, our aid to them contingent upon certain behaviors WRT the Palestinians.
Its reasonable to conclude they haven't as the Israelis are making no constructive efforts towards the Palestinians, in fact they are busy turning Gaza into a modern version of the Warsaw ghetto.
http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=4343
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/s … 03,00.html
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/05/ … fulbright/

Why not just cut the aid?
Do you think that is the only lobbying group those people spoke to during their campaigns? AIPAC is one of HUNDREDS of lobbies in Washington. It's more of an issue that the candidates speak to ANY lobbies...not just AIPAC.
Probably not, it would be interesting to see how many lobby groups representing foreign countries they have addressed.
Fuck Israel
2008-06-07 01:00:22
killcommies
Member
+3|6226

BN wrote:

hillary likes the pope
the pope was in the hitler youth
therefore: hillary loves hitler

mcain = hitler lover
I've seen McCain wearing a jew hat, so i serously doubt that.

To each his own as far as politics go, I disagree with communism, and people disagree with fascism.
2008-06-07 01:08:39
killcommies
Member
+3|6226

Snake wrote:

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

Hitler talks about how much he hated Jews, yet the Nazi's were Christian. Which is a Jewish religion (same for Islam). These Jew haters are hilarious. They don't even realise the only reason their religion exists is because of the Jews.
If I remember rightly, wasnt Hitlers Grandma a jew?

People who talk like this should be deported, imprisoned, or hung.
Its never been proven he had any jewish blood in his ancestry... and honestly it cannot be proven. I strongly disagree jews in general were targeted - Hundreds of thousands supported the National Socialist party, fought in the ranks of the SS and Wehrmacht - even winning knights crosses and occupying general ranks. I believe the 'jew' in general was such a high target because the majority of them in Germany at the time were involved in communist activities.
2008-06-07 01:14:42
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
They were only allowed into the SS at the end of the war when the Germans were losing as a final desperate measure.
2008-06-07 01:25:34
killcommies
Member
+3|6226

ZombieVampire! wrote:

They were only allowed into the SS at the end of the war when the Germans were losing as a final desperate measure.
Wehrmacht through the entire war, officer and general positions through the entire war.
2008-06-07 02:00:30
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
Such as?
2008-06-07 02:16:27
killcommies
Member
+3|6226
Admiral Bernhard Rogge
2008-06-07 02:21:25
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,822|6528|eXtreme to the maX
BTW your sig is waaaaay too big.
Please check the Forum rules.
Fuck Israel
2008-06-07 02:53:23
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249

killcommies wrote:

Admiral Bernhard Rogge
All the literature I can find says that he had some Jewish blood, and that he had to get a Racial Purity Certificate to serve: that is, he had to be declared to be non-Jewish.
2008-06-07 02:57:35
killcommies
Member
+3|6226
Your words make it seem very biased. They did not have to be declared non-jewish, merely of purity. Luftwaffe General Helmut Wilberg would serve as another example. Normal jews are highly mixed with Europeans, ones with majority jewish blood have their own facial characteristics - Germany wanted it's country for the Germans.

Last edited by killcommies (2008-06-07 03:05:34)

2008-06-07 03:05:31
ZombieVampire!
The Gecko
+69|6249
But the point is they did discriminate Jews, they just didn't consider those with a small amount of Jewish blood to be Jews.  So, by their definition they didn't allow Jews into the military.
2008-06-07 03:07:01
killcommies
Member
+3|6226

ZombieVampire! wrote:

But the point is they did discriminate Jews, they just didn't consider those with a small amount of Jewish blood to be Jews.  So, by their definition they didn't allow Jews into the military.
Theres a book by the name of "Hitler's Jewish Soldiers." Jews of full blood were indeed allowed into the military as long as they showed German physical characteristics. Jews were not "discriminated" against, Germany for the Germans - NOBODY else - that is what I am getting at.

Last edited by killcommies (2008-06-07 03:07:35)

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 9

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard